Abstract
This study uses insurance claims data for patients who have undergone breast-conserving surgery to examine clinical complications and economic outcomes associated with repeated surgery.
For early stage breast cancer, breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is a compelling alternative to mastectomy, resulting in lower complication rates, equivalent patient-reported quality of life and cosmesis, and equivalent or better survival rates. Unfortunately, these benefits may not be fully realized in women who undergo repeated surgery, usually to increase the resection margin. Although considerable attention has been drawn to this problem, the costs and complications resulting from additional operations are not well-characterized. Herein we present a retrospective review of insurance claims data for BCS patients performed to assess clinical complications and economic outcomes.
Methods
Private claims data were analyzed for 9837 women undergoing BCS for recently diagnosed breast carcinoma between January 2010 and December 2013 (continuous 2-year private insurance enrollment in Illinois, Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma; initial BCS identified via the codes in Table 1; diagnosis was any International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision [ICD-9] diagnosis code 174.0 through 174.9 within 60 days). Patients undergoing a second open breast surgery (mastectomy or BCS) within 90 days of the initial BCS were classified as having a repeated surgery (Table 1). Complications were identified via a set of 8 Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and 25 ICD-9 diagnosis and procedure codes (Table 1). The analysis included these complications and the total cost of all allowed health care claims, related and unrelated to breast cancer care, within 2 years following diagnosis. Statistical significance values were calculated for complications via a χ2test with a 2-tailed P value and for costs via 95% CIs. The study was exempt from institutional review board approval and patient informed consent because all data used were deidentified.
Table 1. Codes Used for Breast Surgeries and Associated Complications.
| Code Type | Code | Description |
|---|---|---|
| CPT | 19301 | Initial BCS: partial mastectomy |
| 19302 | Initial BCS: partial mastectomy with axillary dissection | |
| 19020 | Repeated BCS: mastotomy with exploration or abscess drainage | |
| 19101 | Repeated BCS: open breast biopsy | |
| 19120 | Repeated BCS: excision of breast tumor | |
| 19125 | Repeated BCS: excision of marked breast tumor | |
| 19301 | Repeated BCS: partial mastectomy | |
| 19302 | Repeated BCS: partial mastectomy with axillary dissection | |
| 19499 | Repeated BCS: unlisted breast procedure | |
| 19303 | Conversion to mastectomy: simple mastectomy | |
| 19304 | Conversion to mastectomy: subcutaneous mastectomy | |
| 19305 | Conversion to mastectomy: radical mastectomy | |
| 19306 | Conversion to mastectomy: radical mastectomy, urban type | |
| 19307 | Conversion to mastectomy: modified radical mastectomy | |
| CPT | 10030 | Percutaneous image-guided fluid collection drainage |
| 10060 | Incision and drainage of abscess | |
| 10140 | Incision and drainage of hematoma and/or seroma | |
| 10180 | Incision and drainage of postoperative wound infection | |
| 12020 | Treatment of superficial wound dehiscence; simple | |
| 12021 | Treatment of superficial wound dehiscence; packing | |
| 13160 | Closure of extensive surgical wound or dehiscence | |
| 19020 | Mastotomy with exploration or abscess drainage | |
| ICD-9 Procedure | 85.0 | Mastotomy |
| 85.82 | Split-thickness graft to breast | |
| 85.84 | Pedicle graft to breast | |
| 85.85 | Muscle flap graft to breast | |
| 85.91 | Aspiration of breast | |
| 86.01 | Aspiration of skin and subcutaneous tissue | |
| 86.04 | Other incision with drainage of skin and/or subcutaneous tissue | |
| ICD-9 Diagnosis | 611.0 | Breast inflammatory disease |
| 611.3 | Breast fat necrosis | |
| 611.71 | Mastodynia | |
| 680.2 | Trunk carbuncle and/or furuncle | |
| 682.2 | Trunk cellulitis and/or abscess | |
| 682.3 | Upper arm cellulitis and/or abscess | |
| 996.69 | Implant/prosthesis infection | |
| 998.11 | Hemorrhage complicating a procedure | |
| 998.12 | Hematoma complicating a procedure | |
| 998.13 | Seroma complicating a procedure | |
| 998.3 | Wound disruption | |
| 998.32 | Surgical wound disruption | |
| 998.51 | Infected postoperative seroma | |
| 998.59 | Postoperative infection | |
| 998.6 | Postoperative fistula | |
| 998.83 | Nonhealing surgical wound | |
| 998.89 | Other specified complication | |
| 998.9 | Unspecified complication |
Abbreviations: CPT, Current Procedural Terminology; ICD-9, International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision.
Results
Among 9837 women, mean age 53 years, 2282 women (23.2%; 95% CI, 22.4%-24.0%) underwent at least 1 additional breast operation (Table 2). Women who underwent an additional operation waited an average of 24 days for the second procedure. The mean cost for a patient undergoing any repeated surgery was $16 072 higher, and 56.4% of those added costs were incurred within 6 months after the initial BCS. The mean 2-year total health care costs increased by $11 621 for patients undergoing a repeated BCS and $26 276 for patients undergoing a subsequent mastectomy. Increased costs owing to a repeated surgery were statistically significant (mean, $89 016; 95% CI, $87 132-$90 899 without an additional surgery vs mean, $105 088; 95% CI, $101 408-$108 768 with a repeated surgery; P <.001).
Table 2. Costs and Complications for BCS Patients.
| Variable | No. (%) | P Value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BCS, No Repeat | Repeated Breast Surgery | |||
| Repeated BCS | Convert to Mastectomy | |||
| Patients | 7555 (76.8) | 1589 (16.2) | 693 (7.0) | |
| Mean 2-year total health care claims, $ (95% CI) | 89 016 (87 132-90 899) | 100 637 (96 419-104 856) | 115 292 (108 033-122 552) | <.001 |
| Complication | ||||
| Any complication(s) | 1783 (23.6) | 516 (32.5) | 279 (40.3) | <.001 |
| Infection | 746 (9.9) | 222 (14.0) | 127 (18.3) | <.001 |
| Hematoma and/or seroma | 655 (8.7) | 203 (12.8) | 115 (16.6) | <.001 |
| Breast pain | 525 (6.9) | 111 (7.0) | 42 (6.1) | .69 |
| Fat necrosis | 187 (2.5) | 120 (7.6) | 45 (6.5) | <.001 |
For women undergoing a repeated surgery, the likelihood of experiencing at least 1 complication was 47.6% higher (relative, 11.2%; absolute, 34.8%; 95% CI, 32.9%-36.7% vs 23.6%; 95% CI, 22.6%-24.6%) and the likelihood of experiencing multiple complications was 89.1% higher (relative, 4.9%; absolute, 5.5%; 95% CI, 5.0%-6.0% vs 10.4%; 95% CI, 9.1%-11.7%) than for patients undergoing a single BCS. For patients undergoing a repeated surgery, infection, hematoma and/or seroma, and fat necrosis were the most common complications. In the 3 months following the initial BCS, complications were twice as likely in patients undergoing a repeated breast surgery (16.2%; 95% CI, 14.7%-17.7% vs 7.9%; 95% CI, 7.3%-8.5%; P < .001). Increased complications owing to a repeated surgery were statistically significant.
Discussion
These data demonstrate that in 23.2% of BCS patients, the full benefits of BCS are not realized owing to the added costs and complications of subsequent surgery. For example, mastectomy is associated with a 15.7% 2-year infection rate, which is similar to the 15.3% experienced by repeated-surgery patients. Patients undergoing additional surgeries incur an average $16 072 in added health care costs. Indeed, reexcision after BCS owing to margin status has been deemed “the other breast cancer epidemic.” Notably, the data in this work preceded the recent SSO-ASTRO margin guidelines, which may impact future repeated surgery rates. Although many women will continue to benefit from BCS, these findings demonstrate quantitative evidence of a patient-centered and fiscal requirement to implement techniques to reduce BCS reoperations, including advanced margin evaluation.
References
- 1.Chatterjee A, Pyfer B, Czerniecki B, Rosenkranz K, Tchou J, Fisher C. Early postoperative outcomes in lumpectomy versus simple mastectomy. J Surg Res. 2015;198(1):143-148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Jagsi R, Li Y, Morrow M, et al. . Patient-reported quality of life and satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes after breast conservation and mastectomy with and without reconstruction: results of a survey of breast cancer survivors. Ann Surg. 2015;261(6):1198-1206. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Chen K, Liu J, Zhu L, Su F, Song E, Jacobs LK. Comparative effectiveness study of breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy in the general population: A NCDB analysis. Oncotarget. 2015;6(37):40127-40140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Jagsi R, Jiang J, Momoh AO, et al. . Complications after mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction for breast cancer: a claims-based analysis. Ann Surg. 2016;263(2):219-227. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Cody HS III, Van Zee KJ. Reexcision—the other breast cancer epidemic. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(6):568-569. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Thill M, Baumann K, Barinoff J. Intraoperative assessment of margins in breast conservative surgery—still in use? J Surg Oncol. 2014;110(1):15-20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]